National Security Agency (NSA)

Latest in National Security Agency (NSA)

Executive Order 12333

What Does ‘Collection’ Mean? Discretion and Confusion in the Intelligence Community

Just before John Brennan ended his term as director of the CIA in 2017, his agency issued a new set of guidelines under Executive Order (EO) 12333, the general charter that governs the intelligence community. Entitled “Central Intelligence Agency Intelligence Activities: Procedures Approved by the Attorney General Pursuant to Executive Order 12333,” the guidelines received little attention.

Cybersecurity: Crime and Espionage

Project Raven: What Happens When U.S. Personnel Serve a Foreign Intelligence Agency?

It’s been known since 2012 that a Baltimore-based company called Cyber Point had a contract with the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to assist its newly-established signals intelligence agency (then called the National Electronic Security Authority) with “advice on cyberdefense and policy,” as Ellen Nakashima reported at the time for the Washington Post.


To Split or Not to Split: The Future of CYBERCOM’s Relationship with NSA

U.S. Cyber Command (CYBERCOM) is the U.S. armed forces command charged with offensive and defensive cyber operations. Since 2010, it has coexisted with NSA as two organizations under one director. It is simultaneously embedded within U.S. Strategic Command (STRATCOM), a functional (i.e., non-geographic) command with broader responsibility for detecting and deterring strategic attacks against the United States. Both arrangements are likely coming to an end in the near future.

FISA: 702 Collection

Today's Section 702 Hearing: Prepared Testimony and Ideas for Reform

The House Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing today starting at 10am on the renewal of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Earlier in 2016, Lawfare, in conjunction with the Hoover Institution’s National Security Working Group, produced a number of papers on the subject. Lawfare readers may be interested in reviewing them in connection with today’s hearing:

Secrecy: Leaks Prosecutions

Harold Thomas Martin III Indicted on Charges of Willful Retention of National Defense Information

On Wednesday, a federal grand jury indicted Harold ("Hal") Thomas Martin III, a former private contractor for Booz Allen Hamilton, of willful retention of national security information. The 20-count indictment describes his unauthorized retention of documents belonging to the National Security Agency, as well as the Central Intelligence Agency, U.S. Cyber Command, and the National Reconnaissance Office; the theft took place over a period as early as 1996 until August 27, 2016.

National Security Agency (NSA)

Breathe Easy: Rick Ledgett’s Retirement is Not a Political Protest

Late Friday, word came out of NSA that the highly-respected Deputy Director Rick Ledgett would be retiring in the spring. Understandably, people wondered whether this was the first indication of trouble out of the intelligence community under President Trump. Was this a sign that principled career officials were resigning in protest; were they being pushed out in favor of political allies of the White House?


NSA Compliance and Congress’s Plan: How to Account for Flaws in the Metadata Program?

In the extraordinary transparency that followed Edward Snowden’s 2013 revelations, one tantalizing mystery remained: how did the NSA persist until early 2009 in querying metadata under the now-replaced section 215 program with search terms (“identifiers”) that lacked a key requirement imposed by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC)? John DeLong and Susan Hennessey recently posted a comprehensive explanation of this serious compliance problem.


Understanding Footnote 14: NSA Lawyering, Oversight, and Compliance

In 2009, the government notified the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) of a serious issue in the design and description of the National Security Agency’s (NSA) Business Records metadata program. In short, the NSA had implemented a part of that program using an erroneous interpretation of the term “archived data” that appeared in the court’s order. An inadvertent mistake in later reports to the FISC concealed the fact of the misinterpretation, which was incorporated into multiple reports over time.

Subscribe to Lawfare